Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 5, 2025
Measuring Frailty in HIV-infected Individuals. Identification of Frail Patients is the First Step to Amelioration and Reversal of Frailty
Published on: July 24, 2013
Development and validation of a hospital frailty risk measure using Canadian clinical administrative data
Joseph Emmanuel Amuah1, Katy Molodianovitsh1, Sarah Carbone1
1Canadian Institute for Health Information (Amuah, Molodianovitsh, Carbone, Diestelkamp, Guo, Li, Karmakar-Hore); School of Epidemiology and Public Health (Amuah), University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ont.; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (Carbone), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.; School of Public Health Sciences (Guo, Maxwell), University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ont.; Division of Geriatric Medicine (Hogan), Department of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta.; School of Pharmacy (Maxwell), University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ont.; Department of Critical Care Medicine (Muscedere), Queen's University; Canadian Frailty Network (Muscedere), Kingston, Ont.; Division of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Medicine (Rockwood), Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS; Division of Geriatric Medicine (Sinha), Department of Medicine, University of Toronto; National Institute on Ageing (Sinha), Ryerson University, Toronto, Ont.; School of Physiotherapy and Division of Geriatric Medicine (Theou), Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS.
Background:
Accessible measures specific to the Canadian context are needed to support health system planning for older adults living with frailty. We sought to develop and validate the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) Hospital Frailty Risk Measure (HFRM).
Methods:
Using CIHI administrative data, we conducted a retrospective cohort study involving patients aged 65 years and older who were discharged from Canadian hospitals from Apr. 1, 2018, to Mar. 31, 2019. We used a 2-phase approach to develop and validate the CIHI HFRM. The first phase, construction of the measure, was based on the deficit accumulation approach (identification of age-related conditions using a 2-year look-back). The second phase involved refinement into 3 formats (continuous risk score, 8 risk groups and binary risk measure), with assessment of their predictive validity for several frailty-related adverse outcomes using data to 2019/20. We assessed convergent validity with the United Kingdom Hospital Frailty Risk Score.
Results:
The cohort consisted of 788 701 patients. The CIHI HFRM included 36 deficit categories and 595 diagnosis codes that cover morbidity, function, sensory loss, cognition and mood. The median continuous risk score was 0.111 (interquartile range 0.056-0.194, equivalent to 2-7 deficits); 35.1% (n = 277 000) of the cohort were found at risk of frailty (≥ 6 deficits). The CIHI HFRM showed satisfactory predictive validity and reasonable goodness-of-fit. For the continuous risk score format (unit = 0.1), the hazard ratio (HR) for 1-year risk of death was 1.39 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38-1.41), with a C-statistic of 0.717 (95% CI 0.715-0.720); the odds ratio for high users of hospital beds was 1.85 (95% CI 1.82-1.88), with a C-statistic of 0.709 (95% CI 0.704-0.714), and the HR of 90-day admission to long-term care was 1.91 (95% CI 1.88-1.93), with a C-statistic of 0.810 (95% CI 0.808-0.813). Compared with the continuous risk score, using a format of 8 risk groups had similar discriminatory ability and the binary risk measure had slightly weaker performance.
Interpretation:
The CIHI HFRM is a valid tool showing good discriminatory power for several adverse outcomes. The tool can be used by decision-makers and researchers by providing information on hospital-level prevalence of frailty to support system-level capacity planning for Canada's aging population.
